Linux-Advocacy Digest #331, Volume #34 Tue, 8 May 01 15:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: where's the linux performance? ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Isaac)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Austin Ziegler)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Austin Ziegler)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("JD")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 19:42:10 +0200
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Like perl? python? C? typing? a fast and powerful cli? Then you have
>> > nirvana.
>> > Otherwise you have 'cool', but NOT something for a day to day
>> > recreational user.
>> > At all.
>> >
>> >
>> Yep, this guy is a programmer. He'll definitely enjoy Linux, as it at
>> least comes with all the dev tools he'll ever need. Gee, what happened
>> to that BASIC interpreter that used to ship with Windows?
>>
>> HAND,
>>
>> Mart
>>
>> --
>> Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve Gimme back my youth for the
>> dead man's curve For that icy feel when you start to swerve
>>
>> John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
>
> You don't suppose that these people are running for this years' Darwin
> award do you??
> Maybe we should create a second-runner up award. Like the "Billy
> Butt-Crust" award?
>
Yes,
That's why I left the last remarks, because that's what set me off on
this rant. Here is a guy who says that he is a programmer and likes to
fool around with the guts of an OS, and this nitwit starts spouting his
uninformed opinion. Really makes you wonder about the human race, or
whether a whopping big asteroid wouldn't be a good idea.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 17:43:34 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 7 May 2001 02:16:12 +0200
<9d4maq$3c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sun, 6 May 2001 23:05:43 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > FILE *fp = fopen("LPT1","wt");
>> > if (!fp){
>> > printf("failure opening printer port");
>> > return 1;
>> > }
>> > fprintf(fp,"Here I'm printing text using fprintf() on windows\n");
>> > fclose(fp);
>>
>> Won't work if the printer is Postscript and does not auto-detect plain
>> ASCII.
>
>How do you handle those printers in Linux? Output PS?
>I'm interested, not attacking.
FILE * fp = fopen("/dev/lpt1", "w");
if everything's set up correctly.
>
>> > Install a PS printer driver, print to file, done deal.
>> > And *I*, as the developer, don't need to know anything about PS to do
>it,
>> > too. It will create a perfectly legal PS file, too.
>>
>> No, instead you have to know about GDI and printer setup dialogs. The
>> real advantage (and it is a significant one) is that you can use nearly
>> the same code for display. Not _exactly_ the same in most cases, as
>> screens don't have pages or headers or any of that, but mostly.
>
>Yes, that is part of my point, that it's easier to add printing to an
>application. This make it harder to create printing support.
>And the *usual* case of printing is printing to a printer.
>Besice, *I*, as the developer, can know nothing about PS, and *you*, as the
>user, can still output his printing in PS.
>
>
>> There exist libraries for Linux that allow similar things.
>
>Take X output and turn it into PS?
Something higher level, perhaps. But "X output" is a bytestream
(documented in O'Reilly Volume 0). In theory, it could be decoded,
but it's two way (which causes minor problems) and I don't know
if anyone's done it. (It would be interesting to see if there's
a "pseudo-display" that does such; there is an X memory frame
buffer that draws into internal memory that might be pressed into
service; however, apps are going to have to understand that different
fonts should be used for a 300 dpi (or 600, or 1200) "display screen". :-) )
It's far easier -- from the app developer's point of view, maybe --
to generate the PostScript directly, although it's not as simple
as Windows by any means (Windows can use identical code -- from the
app's point of view -- to print, making it true WYSIWYG -- if the
fonts aren't screwed up, if the app is smart enough to not use
pixel-based (as opposed to, say, inch- or mm-based), and if the
printer drivers don't have problems. :-) )
This also assumes the app developer has an intimate understanding
of PostScript -- not guaranteed by any means. Windows makes it easy,
unless something goes wrong.
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 8d:01h:21m actually running Linux.
This is a .sig.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 18:20:54 GMT
On Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:53 GMT, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 20:35:54
>>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>
>>> DirectX *sucks*.
>>
>>About as useless a statement as "Linux sucks". _How_ exactly does DirectX
>>suck?
>
>If I knew that, I'd have to be working for Microsoft and have a brain
>the size of a planet. All I know is it sucks. The real question isn't
>how it sucks, but why it sucks. If I knew that, I'd be working for Id
>and driving a Ferrari.
So in other words you don't know what you are talking about and have
no facts to back up your foolish statement?
flatfish
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 18:21:32 GMT
Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> one *huge* weakness of pascal is that it interprets vectors and arrays
> of different sizes as wholy different types. thus if you make a
> procedure to handle strings of lenght 10, you need another, distinct,
> procedure to handle strings of length 11.
>
You don't need any such thing, because strings are
dynamically allocated and handled differently, but as far as
vectors and arrays are concerned, an array of length 10 is
actually a different type than an array of length 11: what
will you do with the 11th element if only ten have been
defined?
Isn't the access of the 11th element of a 10 element array
what is usually called a buffer overflow, which is one of
the most known security pitfalls ever found?
What you call a weakness is the reason I love it. When
you're dealing with a large project with many developers
involved, a strict type checking is the only way to produce
a robust code. You don't need to follow all the lines of
code to find the error: you just look at the declarations to
locate the potentially dangerous situations (as
inappropriate dereferencings and such). I know that it's
annoying to write extra declarations (which don't produce
any code, BTW), but it's better than parsing a few hundred
thousand lines of code in search of a few silly mistakes.
--
Giuliano Colla
Before activating the tongue, make sure that the brain is
connected (anonymous)
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:27:02 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Edward Rosten wrote:
> >>
> >> > I find that my Epson worked just fine under linux going thru GS. No
> >> > problems at all. Even PDF files printed quickly and were no problem.
> >>
> >> Its not the printer driver thats the problem. Some PDFs seem to choke
> >> my version of GS, but I've been through loads of PDFs recently.
> >>
> >> -ed
> >>
> >> --
> >> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
> >>
> >> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
> >
> > Which version of Gs do you have? That may be a problem.
> >
>
> 5.1
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
>
> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
Same here. Guess I'll have to print more PDFs to see if there is a
problem.
GS has a lot of higher versions out there now. Along with their docs
on-line.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 18:22:52 GMT
On Tue, 08 May 2001 16:03:36 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>It is the *consumers*, not the *producers*, (actually an abstraction of
>the interactions between them know as "the market", but the consumers
>have all the power, and the producers are mere supplicants) that set the
>value of something. How much is a song worth, IN TERMS OF PRODUCTION
>COST AND COMPETITIVE PROFIT? If the value of the song is inflated
>outrageously simply because the owner makes it unavailable at a
>(profitable but lesser) cost, then that is not "the value of the song".
Do you really think that this is the way the statute would be applied?
If I remember correctly, the sentencing guidelines for assessing the
criminal penalities for the act explicitly use the retail value of the
copied work. That's highly suggestive that the same computation would
be used for determining whether the criminal copyright statute had
been violated.
More interesting questions might be what is the assigned value of an
individual song when the song is only obtainable through legal
channels as part of an album or for a work which is out of print
and not available at any price.
Let's remember that the context for this discussion is the criminal
statute and the triggering of penalties and not it's value to a
given consumer who can obtain an illicit copy at little or no cost.
As Jay pointed out, interpreting the statute with the song value
interpreted your way would allow the infringer to avoid prosecution
by destroyiung the market value of the song. No court would allow
that.
You were simply wrong about there being no criminal statutes concerning
infringement. You backpedalled a little by stating that a commercial
enterprise was required, but that too was wrong. Willful copying of
10 copies or $1000 worth of copyrighted material is a violation of
paragraph 506(a)(2) of Title 17 even if not for commercial or personal
gain. Note the "or" at the end of paragraph 506(a)(1).
Just go on to something else. Wallowing around in this is just making
you look worse. It's costing you the last of your usenet credibility.
Isaac
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:56:11 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Nah! FUD!
> > >
> > > You qouted the whole articles for *two* words?
> > > And what was FUD about it?
> >
> > GPL is a viral thing... totally untrue.
>
> Really? Show me how I can incorporate GPL code with any other code without
> turning the whole thing to GPL?
> Where is the GPLed browser using Gecko?
> Where is non-GPL KDE application?
>
> http://www.openave.net/community/features/inoc.shtml
> http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.technocrat.net/964911538/index_html
> +konqueror+license&hl=en
I think a lot of people get mired down in the details without realizing
the whole forest in front of them. I got most of my software thru Sun
which has GPL code in it. Sun had libraries that mix with GPL code and
still sells it. In the code however, is a mention of GPL. Maybe Sun
pays a small royalty to the programers?? I don't know, its what I see
that I have on hand that tells me GPL isn't a problem. Most of the GPL
software that shipped with Sun OS was on a separate CD. Sun does not
support that software as they didn't write it and you have to read the
docs that came with it. Also, look at IBM.
The thing I sense of the spirit of GPL is to prevent MS from taking it
and owning it and charging a high price for it. As long as companies
give it away or give credit and pay royalties for it thru special
agreements I see no problem. The best thing to do for a lone-wolf
programmer to do is see his lawyer if in doubt.
Why do I see so many Linux distros that have some good programs provided
written with GPL code for sale?
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:59:07 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 21:01:21
> [...]
> >Because I screwed up in his eyes once. I later mentioned that I have to
> >go thru care-giver hell to give help to my mother-in-law in her need.
> >Apparently he hasn't had too much in the line of responsibilies yet or
> >obligations to meet. But that's ok, I do admire his argumentative
> >skills even if he makes an occasional mistake. I like him even more
> >when he trounces and spanks a few trolls now and then. :-))
>
> Well, I thank you for the compliments, but I have to admit that you are
> giving too much credit to my memory. What was this 'screw up' that I'm
> supposed to be remembering?
>
> Perhaps I was (whoops) chastising you for developing for Windows or
> something? Anyway, I don't hold grudges, sir; I mean that in general
> because, as I've admitted, my memory is rather variable in temper in
> such matters. Sorry for any misunderstandings.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
It was with Eric F's stuff about OEM pricings. But no big deal.
Lets go spank some trolls!
--
V
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:01:40 -0400
On Tue, 8 May 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001
> [...]
>> I think you meant to say that it's an irrelevancy. Especially since you
>> tried to claim that a program written that uses an API is derivative of
>> a particular implementation of that API ("a library"). Which is ...
>> well, let's just say that it's one of your sillier ideas, which is
>> something worth noting.
> Stop acting like a simpleton. Your metaphysical idea of "an API" as
> having anything to do with the matter is what is preventing you from
> acting like a reasonable person, knowledgable of the issue and balanced
> in your opinion. If you need to go study for a few years before you
> could possibly understand that statement, it wouldn't surprise me.
> Perhaps you're simply not bright enough to understand that it is
> perfectly reasonable and accurate.
One wonders, perchance, why Maxie feels it necessary to pretend that
everything is about metaphysics. Maybe he can't think of things in real
terms, so he has to resort to meta-discussions ... where he sounds just
as foolish as he does every other time.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 12:04:34 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > Eric Leblanc wrote:
> > >
> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Typically, when trying to break encryption without knowing the algorithm,
> > > > you either look for common algorithms, or you look for patterns that match
> > > > known language patterns. If you disguise the language patterns by making
> > > > sure that even the same phrase doesn't create the same series of bytes, then
> > > > you remove the ability to deduce a new algorithm.
> > >
> > > Just a historical point here.
> > >
> > > When the German made the Enigma machine they made it so that if you encoded
> > > the letter 'A' it never coded itself to 'A'. From what i read, it helped the
> > > Allies find pattern.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Yes, if you had the software that encoded the data, you could probably
> > > > > > reverse engineer it and figure it out, but if you only have encrypted
> > > > data
> > > > > > and know that a key is 4 bits, then you could spend eternity looking for
> > > > the
> > > > > > right algorithm.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are only 16 possible 4 bit keys. NSA would probably spend about 16
> > > > > microseconds decrypting your message, no matter how you applied the key.
> > > >
> > > > I doubt it.
> > >
> > > Post your algorithm to sci.crypt.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Eric Leblanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Departement de Mathematique % Univ. du Quebec a Montreal, Montreal, Qc
> > > Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no
> > > account be allowed to do the job.
> > > -- Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
> >
> > Hehehe... that's a good idea, posting. Can you imagine trying to
> > decipher a message when the data stream you intercept is continual
> > gibberish that never stops?
>
> YOu mean like the combined works of
> flatfish- - -, Chad Myers, Pete Goodwin, and Erik Funkybreath, et al?
>
> >
> > --
> > V
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
LOL!!! I never looked at it that way! LOL!!!
--
V
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 15:06:19 -0400
On Tue, 8 May 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001
>> On Sun, 6 May 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>> Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May 2001 20:23:30
>>>> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>> You mean the library won't work if a programmer makes a function call
>>>>> unless the function is documented?
>>>> Of course it would work. The problem would be that you wouldn't know
>>>> what it does.
>>>> Similar to standing on an elevator, when the floors' buttons has no
>>>> numbers, or any other identification.
>>> How much you want to bet that I can quickly get to the floor I want,
>>> every time?
>> If the numbers aren't anywhere on or near the buttons, and they're not
>> necessarily wired in an ascending or descending order, then you're not
>> going to get where you expect to quickly -- or at all.
> "If... if... if...." What's your point?
If you read what was said, instead of foolishly babbling on like you
normally do, you'd have noted that Ayende was saying that working with
an undocumented function call is like being in an elevator with
unnumbered buttons that aren't necessarily in an easily-discoverable
order. Then again ... I'm not sure why anyone bothers to use analogies
when you're involved, since you're obviously too stupid to understand
them.
>>>> You know *how* to use them, you don't know what they will do.
>>> Many function calls are "self-documenting", in that respect, aren't
>>> they?
>> Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
> Many functions, yes or no. There is no reason to quibble about
> "sometimes", since we are only talking about "many", to begin with. Get
> it?
Then the answer is no. Many functions (even *most functions*) are not
self-documenting.
-f
--
austin ziegler * Ni bhionn an rath ach mar a mbionn an smacht
Toronto.ON.ca * (There is no Luck without Discipline)
=================* I speak for myself alone
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 12:07:20 -0700
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On 08 May 2001 08:03:33 GMT, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 07 May 2001 06:24:26 GMT,
> > Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Edward Rosten wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Could it be that there's a bug in Linux? Or in the drivers? Not in the
> >>>> drivel you post?
> >>>
> >>> Shut up and stop whinging. Just do what any one of the helpful people
> >>> have suggested and put a script in rc.local. If you couldn't be arsed to
> >>> either do that or fix the bug, then you shouldn't be arsed to post
> >>> either.
> >>
> >> Shut up period. I tried various suggestions. None of them worked.
> >
> >I'm confused now, really confused.
> >
> >Pete Goodwin is not an idiot, in fact hes a degreed coder, who has
> >posted under the GPL.
> >
> >So whats wrong here, why cant Pete fix this problem, or at least email
> >those maintaining the DHCP stuff and work with them to fix it ?
>
> I suspect he's really stubborn and pigheaded. I have two degrees too,
> and work with PHD mathematicians and engineers. Many highly educated
> people are very myopic and some have trouble thinking outside "their
> box".
>
> You're right though. Something is not right. Either Goodwin is
> a degreed programmer who can't tie his own shoes, or he's
> purposely being stubborn for some unknown reason.
I knew a Boeing engineer that tried to change his spark plugs in his
ford with a pair of pliers! He broke half of the plugs in the process.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "JD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 14:15:56 -0500
"Austin Ziegler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 8 May 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> > Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001
> > [...]
> >> I think you meant to say that it's an irrelevancy. Especially since you
> >> tried to claim that a program written that uses an API is derivative of
> >> a particular implementation of that API ("a library"). Which is ...
> >> well, let's just say that it's one of your sillier ideas, which is
> >> something worth noting.
> > Stop acting like a simpleton. Your metaphysical idea of "an API" as
> > having anything to do with the matter is what is preventing you from
> > acting like a reasonable person, knowledgable of the issue and balanced
> > in your opinion. If you need to go study for a few years before you
> > could possibly understand that statement, it wouldn't surprise me.
> > Perhaps you're simply not bright enough to understand that it is
> > perfectly reasonable and accurate.
>
> One wonders, perchance, why Maxie feels it necessary to pretend that
> everything is about metaphysics. Maybe he can't think of things in real
> terms, so he has to resort to meta-discussions ... where he sounds just
> as foolish as he does every other time.
>
Your mind is too good to waste it in discussion with tmax.
John
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
